FZ200, badlands

Started Jan 31, 2014 | Photos
splendors Regular Member • Posts: 255
FZ200, badlands
1

#1,

#2,

#3,

#4,

#5,

Cheers.

 splendors's gear list:splendors's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Canon EOS 70D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
Comment & critique:
Please provide me constructive critique and criticism.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Ronomy
Ronomy Veteran Member • Posts: 4,062
Re: FZ200, badlands

Why did you under expose these?  They look too dark for my taste.

 Ronomy's gear list:Ronomy's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD800 IS Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
kkardster
kkardster Veteran Member • Posts: 9,043
Re: FZ200, badlands

Ronomy wrote:

Why did you under expose these? They look too dark for my taste.

I had the same thought - these look like they may have been taken by moonlight.

-- hide signature --

Bruce
You learn something new every time you press the shutter

 kkardster's gear list:kkardster's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic ZS100 +5 more
phototransformations
phototransformations Senior Member • Posts: 2,840
Re: FZ200, badlands

Agreed. I downloaded one and hit autocontrast, and suddenly one of the images with -1.33EV exposure compensation came alive.

 phototransformations's gear list:phototransformations's gear list
Samsung TL500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +25 more
Jerry045
Jerry045 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,484
Re: FZ200, badlands

Those are very nice landscapes, but I agree with the other guys, they are underexposed. They would pop a bit more if they were a touch brighter.

-- hide signature --

www.flickr.com/photos/av8tor045
Jerry

 Jerry045's gear list:Jerry045's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS20 Sony RX10 IV +2 more
Erik Ohlson
Erik Ohlson Forum Pro • Posts: 20,620
Re: FZ200, badlands

Jerry045 wrote:

Those are very nice landscapes, but I agree with the other guys, they are underexposed. They would pop a bit more if they were a touch brighter.

More than "a tad", I fear - I did a quick "brightness" in PSE8 & on pic #1 it looked OK around +120

-- hide signature --

"Measure wealth not by things you have but by things for which you would not take money"
www.flickr.com/ohlsonmh/ ohlsonmh@yahoo.com

Jack Brandt217
Jack Brandt217 Forum Pro • Posts: 12,826
Re: FZ200, badlands

You're right. My first thoughts were that these need a large dose of lightness a and contrast.

Jack

Jerry045
Jerry045 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,484
Re: FZ200, badlands

I took the liberty of adding in a little brightness and contrast and a small touch of saturation.

I did this pretty quickly, and I am sure a little more tweaking can improve it even more.

Just an example...

-- hide signature --

www.flickr.com/photos/av8tor045
Jerry

 Jerry045's gear list:Jerry045's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS20 Sony RX10 IV +2 more
phototransformations
phototransformations Senior Member • Posts: 2,840
Re: FZ200, badlands

I adjusted the exposure slider to exactly compensate for the negative exposure compensation the OP applied, and the images look quite good at what the camera thought they should be exposed at, though of course the histogram was sketchy. It would be nice if the OP would chime in so we could find out his intention in deliberately under exposing when the camera got it right.

 phototransformations's gear list:phototransformations's gear list
Samsung TL500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +25 more
OP splendors Regular Member • Posts: 255
Re: FZ200, badlands

Ronomy wrote:

Why did you under expose these? They look too dark for my taste.

To Ronomy and others,

Thanks for your all replied and good advice && suggestion.

Yes, I tried to keep the sky not over-exposure and the badlands with grey-white level. So, I get my FZ200 to be under-exposure then for shots.

Cheers.

 splendors's gear list:splendors's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Canon EOS 70D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
Ronomy
Ronomy Veteran Member • Posts: 4,062
Re: FZ200, badlands

Ronomy wrote:

Why did you under expose these? They look too dark for my taste.

To Ronomy and others,

Thanks for your all replied and good advice && suggestion.

Yes, I tried to keep the sky not over-exposure and the badlands with grey-white level. So, I get my FZ200 to be under-exposure then for shots.

Cheers.

Hi Splendors,

If you turn on highlights the camera will tell you if an exposure is over exposed. When playing back image the image will blink in areas that are over exposed. At that point if there is excessive blinking you can reduce the exposure in 1/3rd steps one step at a time until the blinking is reduced or eliminated. You have to take a picture after each step reducing the exposure and examine each image in the camera. After a while you will get the hang of it and dial in the correct exposure.

Cheers, Ron

 Ronomy's gear list:Ronomy's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD800 IS Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
phototransformations
phototransformations Senior Member • Posts: 2,840
Re: FZ200, badlands

splendors wrote:

Thanks for your all replied and good advice && suggestion.

Yes, I tried to keep the sky not over-exposure and the badlands with grey-white level. So, I get my FZ200 to be under-exposure then for shots.

Cheers.

I took a look at some of your other photos, and I see that you routinely underexpose by 1/3 to 1 1/3 stop. Although this does ensure that you'll preserve most of the highlights it also pretty much guarantees that you'll block up the shadows and, if you try to lighten the image you might also get a lot of banding. If you are really concerned about highlights, then perhaps you need to shoot RAW.

Unless this is the "look" you are going for, underexposing this much takes away, in my opinion, more than it adds. If you have not done so yet, it would help you to take a look at some of your images in an editor that lets you see a histogram. Then you'll see that you are not taking advantage of a lot of "room" on the lighter end of the image and are causing things that are not actually black to be recorded as black.

 phototransformations's gear list:phototransformations's gear list
Samsung TL500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +25 more
Ronomy
Ronomy Veteran Member • Posts: 4,062
Re: FZ200, badlands

Good point about using the histogram. Using the in camera histogram is a must. I keep forgetting you have to turn it on. I just leave it on at all times.

 Ronomy's gear list:Ronomy's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD800 IS Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
OP splendors Regular Member • Posts: 255
Re: FZ200, badlands

phototransformations wrote:I took a look at some of your other photos, and I see that you routinely underexpose by 1/3 to 1 1/3 stop. Although this does ensure that you'll preserve most of the highlights it also pretty much guarantees that you'll block up the shadows and, if you try to lighten the image you might also get a lot of banding. If you are really concerned about highlights, then perhaps you need to shoot RAW.

Yes, not only JPG, the RAW has been gotten in the mean time in my FZ200 settings!!

Unless this is the "look" you are going for, underexposing this much takes away, in my opinion, more than it adds. If you have not done so yet, it would help you to take a look at some of your images in an editor that lets you see a histogram. Then you'll see that you are not taking advantage of a lot of "room" on the lighter end of the image and are causing things that are not actually black to be recorded as black.

Copy that. Regarding to my newbie of FZ200 experience, I'm still trying to get something or else.

Maybe (not sure yet), the below pic with the former same one may be PROPER, am I right??

But the blue sky is lighter than the former one ..?!

Cheers.

 splendors's gear list:splendors's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Canon EOS 70D Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
phototransformations
phototransformations Senior Member • Posts: 2,840
Re: FZ200, badlands

Ronomy wrote:

Good point about using the histogram. Using the in camera histogram is a must. I keep forgetting you have to turn it on. I just leave it on at all times.

I confess I haven't been using the histogram much. I find it distracting when I'm composing. I wish it could be assigned to a function button, or would show only when the other Display information shows instead of all the time, or that it could be repositioned to another part of the screen. But I shoot RAW, so highlight recovery that the histogram would spot but my eyes might miss hasn't been hard so far.

 phototransformations's gear list:phototransformations's gear list
Samsung TL500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +25 more
phototransformations
phototransformations Senior Member • Posts: 2,840
Re: FZ200, badlands

I imagine what the scene really looked like, on what looks like a bright, clear day, was something like this:

I got this by changing levels settings in Photoshop. To get it in-camera, you'd probably need to shoot with a little more contrast, but lighten the shadows by using i.Exposure (if that's what it's called). If all you want is an unusually dark blue sky when you shoot, like in your underexposed shots, you probably should get yourself a polarizing filter.

Of course, you don't have to make your photograph look like the actual scene. A photograph is an interpretation, after all. Once you get the images into an image editing program, you can interpret them any way you like, but it's helpful to start with an image that has as much information as possible, and when you underexpose as it seems you usually do, you throw out a lot of information that can't always be recovered later, even in RAW.

This is quite a good book on exposure. I learned a lot from it, even though I've been shooting for many years:

http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-3rd-Edition-Photographs/dp/0817439390

 phototransformations's gear list:phototransformations's gear list
Samsung TL500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +25 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads